Sasquatch Vocalizations 4.0

**enjoy being** · 9th October 2015, 22:59

Well in fact the photo's look a bit different to the other day. Unfortunately I cannot save the original image posted and it also is only one on the web page which cannot be zoomed into. So whatever file form it is it is locked from me doing my own investigation of the photo. I am pretty sure there were no 'facial features' there the other day when I first saw this.
Secondly, if someone takes a photo of such a thing and want's to prove it was an object temporarily inhabiting that space, it seem very obvious to me, to take another photo when it has gone, and have it time stamped.
Certainly strange because the other day I could zoom in and yes, it just looked like a rock, none of you were mentioning facial features, but instead were just talking about light anomalies where the rock in question was not reflecting like the foreground rocks.

And rocks don't all glisten the same, it is very common for some rocks to just look dark and flat next to shinier ones.

**jimmer** · 10th October 2015, 15:08

Originally posted by Nothing

Well in fact the photo's look a bit different to the other day. Unfortunately I cannot save the original image posted and it also is only one on the web page which cannot be zoomed into. So whatever file form it is it is locked from me doing my own investigation of the photo. I am pretty sure there were no 'facial features' there the other day when I first saw this.
Secondly, if someone takes a photo of such a thing and want's to prove it was an object temporarily inhabiting that space, it seem very obvious to me, to take another photo when it has gone, and have it time stamped.
Certainly strange because the other day I could zoom in and yes, it just looked like a rock, none of you were mentioning facial features, but instead were just talking about light anomalies where the rock in question was not reflecting like the foreground rocks.

And rocks don't all glisten the same, it is very common for some rocks to just look dark and flat next to shinier ones.

reno provided me with the hi-res link.
the source image was resolute enough to do the posted analysis.

I did a simple enlargement and contrast enhancement.

the facial features were always there.
so apparent, no one even questioned it at the time.

the file name was changed to protect the setting's location.

**jimmer** · 10th October 2015, 16:56

SV4 Saturday Matinee: Sasquatch in Europe

free popcorn for all!

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HE4hT5fYoBo

**jimmer** · 10th October 2015, 18:29

and now the weekend SV4 creature feature: BIGFOOT: WILLOW CREEK

written and directed by bobcatgothwait, this film got lots of publicity leading to its release.

this theatrical release takes us back to modern day bluff creek, site of the PG footage.

more popcorn!

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9aas865anc

**enjoy being** · 10th October 2015, 22:54

Cool, awaiting the posting of the return to site photo where the object is not there. I'd love to think it is a photo of a sasquatch, but the impetus is in proving it isn't a rock, as I still stand by my own experience and understanding of looking at rocks. Such a shame who ever took the photo didn't zoom in or take more.
Please don't think I am being... whatever the word is. Mean, or difficult, the everyone has an opinion thing, fine. My opinion tends to sit in the middle often. Rather than hard up against the stopper of "this is a sasquatch". See it works both ways. If it were to be a sasquatch, then that is big news and good evidence. Therefore, if it was me who took the photo, I would be making the effort to return to that place to take the required photo.

**Olaf** · 11th October 2015, 09:18

Sorry, seems to be no Sasquatch

I managed to find another photograph of the same location, that was shot
* at another day
* from a slightly different viewpoint

The image is from an official web page of that area.

Name: part of web image.jpg
Views: 182
Size: 20.1 KB

Name: part of web image.jpg
Views: 182
Size: 20.1 KB

(sorry, the forum software shrinks the image before storing, so you have to enlarge it to see the structure)

It shows the same "entity" formation on the right side of the left corner stone.
So I conclude that it is probably no sasquatch, if the same structure is apparent in different shots.

Update 2015-10-12:
Detail enlarged 8x using NNEDI + tonemapped for better clarity

**enjoy being** · 11th October 2015, 10:31

Good work Olaf. And darn, I was really hoping to be wrong. It's funny though because I had not noticed the face so clearly until after posting in the thread. I saw the photo when it was first posted and was most sure then. Reminds me of the other times with various things, paintings included, that I have seen people swear to see two different things and when they finally see that which the other person only could see, they then might find the first thing hard to see.

**jimmer** · 11th October 2015, 13:46

Originally posted by Olaf

:

do you have a source link to take a better look at your found image?
or could you use a service like photobucket to link your image.
that's what many use to post large, resolute images. (like post #409)

you could be right about the anomaly being there, but it's very hard to tell from this posted image.

just wondering how did you found a different image of the same location?

**jimmer** · 11th October 2015, 20:07

olaf was nice enough to PM me with the original image.

turns out it is the same size as posted.

conclusion?
inconclusive. (yet, you could be very right ; )

**The One** · 11th October 2015, 20:13

Hope this image helps below

**jimmer** · 12th October 2015, 00:22

thanks, malc.

what we really need is an ultra-hi-res image, like the original posted image.
that file is huge, allowing lots of enlargement.

this one, not so much, but thanks for the try.